Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 7 May 2025

Vol. 305 No. 10

Nithe i dtosach suíonna - Commencement Matters

Disability Services

The first matter is from Senator McCarthy, whom I believe has a number of guests in the Gallery with him from An Saol Foundation, which is the topic of his Commencement matter this afternoon. I welcome Pádraig Schäler, who is in the Distinguished Visitors' Gallery, as he should be, along with Mary Davie, Patricia O'Byrne and Reinhard Schäler from An Saol Foundation. They are most welcome as guests of Senator McCarthy.

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Niamh Smyth, to Seanad Éireann, for what I believe is her first Commencement matter with us.

I thank the Minister of State for attending.

I rise this afternoon to highlight a critical issue that requires immediate attention, namely, the urgent need for the Government to make a clear and committed statement regarding the funding for An Saol Foundation. I specifically refer to the need for capital funding to advance the Teach An Saol project in Ballymun and to fully implement the 12 recommendations made in the HSE's 2023 report. The An Saol Foundation was set up by Reinhard Schäler and Patricia O'Byrne for their son, Pádraig, who was a 22-year-old student cycling while on holiday in Cape Cod 13 years ago when he unfortunately had an accident and acquired severe brain injuries. Individuals like Pádraig are among the most vulnerable in our healthcare system. They often live with profound and complex requirements and impairments. They require ongoing specialised rehabilitation. The An Saol Foundation offers not just care, but a vision and a belief that those with catastrophic brain injuries can continue to live with dignity, autonomy and connection when the right supports are in place. I visited the foundation in Santry a couple of weeks ago and was fascinated by the families and the people who were there on the ground providing care. It is a fantastic set-up.

Teach An Saol, the capital project at the centre of this issue, would be a purpose-built centre in Ballymun offering residential, day care and community facilities. It is fully in line with international best practice and grounded in years of research, clinical experience and direct engagement with the families who use An Saol's services. It reflects a model of care that is person centred, community based and outcomes driven. That can be seen even in the current An Saol project. It is exactly what our health policy claims to support.

In 2023, as I have already mentioned, the HSE conducted a thorough review of An Saol's work and made 12 clear recommendations. These including reorganising An Saol as a core part of the neurorehabilitation pathway, providing sustainable operational funding and progressing the capital development of the An Saol project in Ballymun. More than a year later, we have had no clear statement from the Department outlining when these recommendations will be implemented. We must not allow this inaction to continue. I ask the Minister of State to confirm whether the Department will provide the necessary capital funding to progress Teach An Saol. The project speaks to the very core of what our healthcare system should be. It is not reactive but proactive. It is not only clinical; it is also compassionate. We often speak about inclusion, dignity and equal access to care in this House. An Saol embodies all of that. The values we have spoken about need to be backed up with action from ourselves and that action must be resourced. I urge the Minister of State to act and not only to fund this project, but to implement the core recommendations, to stand with those living with severe acquired brain injuries such as Pádraig and to support families such as Reinhard, Patricia and Pádraig's aunt, Marie, who are here today.

I thank the Senator for his question and warmly welcome the family who are here today to keep the campaign going for what is a very good cause. The An Saol Foundation does really great work. I thank Senator McCarthy for raising this very important issue and for offering me the opportunity to respond on behalf of the Minister for Children, Disability and Equality, Deputy Foley. Unfortunately, she is in the Dáil Chamber as we speak and could not be here. I am here on her behalf.

In budget 2025, €27 million was allocated for capital projects for disability services. I realise that the crux of the Senator's question is the capital spend. This represents an increase of €4 million on 2024. Under the transfer of functions agreement and in line with the national development plan, this is due to grow to €29.2 million in 2026. This is a significant achievement and reflects the Government's strong commitment to supporting people with disabilities, as set out in the 2025 programme for Government. It also signals our determination to realise the full ambition of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Investment alone is not enough, but it is the foundation for progress.

The disability action plan has ambitious three-year targets for increasing residential placement capacity, accelerating the rate of decongregation, and providing new day service places. While meeting these targets will be dependent on increasing staffing complements within services, providing the necessary capital infrastructure will be of importance also. Independent living and housing will be a major feature of the next national disability strategy. It must be noted that continued cross-Government engagement will be a critical component of the success of this campaign. A senior and dedicated lead within the HSE has been appointed to lead the development of a multi-annual infrastructural strategy for the disability sector and to ensure that there is a strategic, directed growth in investment and the delivery of capital projects.

The An Saol Foundation was established by the family the Cathaoirleach kindly welcomed, and it is lovely to see Pádraig and Reinhard Schäler. I thank them for being here. The HSE capital and estates section is engaging with An Saol Foundation at a local level in order to assist in progressing the latter's capital project proposal. The HSE has advised me that progress is being made on securing a site for the proposed project and an application for planning permission has been lodged. The HSE has prioritised funding for the site purchase and initial design costs, allocating almost €1.3 million through the capital allocation process. Subject to the timely receipt of all required documentation, the HSE anticipates this project will continue to progress smoothly through the necessary stages of approval and development. The HSE is working with An Saol to advise on the requirements that need to be met at each step of the process. I realise that, for those on the ground driving these projects, that process can be slow and arduous, but these types of community group and charity projects that engage with the HSE are the most fruitful of all, having a targeted approach and being the eyes and ears on the ground as to the types of service needed. While patience is required, determination always wins out. I commend the Schäler family on theirs.

The necessary stages include progressing the project through the approvals process for both the property acquisition and the capital funding. It is important to note all new capital projects are subject to the national HSE approval processes, which in turn are informed by the Government’s national infrastructure guidelines. Projects are also subject to prioritisation within available resources.

A clinical evaluation of the service provided by the An Saol Foundation was undertaken in February 2023. A review and recommendations report was subsequently published by the clinical lead for disability and the national clinical programme for people with disability, in the HSE. The review made 12 strategic recommendations to guide the development and expansion of services. The Senator referred to these. Since the publication of the report, meaningful progress has been made on many of the recommendations. The Senator will be able to say whether that progress has been meaningful when I conclude. A clinical advisory committee has now been established to support the clinical team and contribute to broader clinical governance.

The development of more objective and measurable admissions and review criteria has commenced. Regular assessments involving clients and their families have been introduced. In addition, a stakeholder working group has been set up to drive progress. An Saol has also deepened its partnerships with international academic institutions and centres of excellence while exploring collaboration opportunities with other brain injury services.

While some actions remain contingent on funding, such as expanding multidisciplinary services and formalising links with community health structures, the foundation has continued to progress implementation within existing resources. The bell means I must conclude, and the Senator may wish to respond.

I thank the Minister of State. We have done all the heavy lifting. We have been reviewed and have the recommendations from the 2023 report, and we also have the site. That is all done and dusted. I appreciate the Minister of State's response, but we need to move further. I am disappointed we are not at the stage of the funding being in place.

If one visits the Teach an Saol project, one will see that it is an essential and life-changing service for people such as Pádraig with severe acquired brain injury. That is why we cannot continue to tell families who are living through unimaginable challenges, as Patricia and Reinhard are, that there is simply no money and we must go through more HSE processes. The cost of inaction, both morally and financially, will be greater as people remain without appropriate care. I urge the Minister of State to reconsider and push this along. I encourage her to meet Reinhard and Patricia and to visit Teach an Saol. I think she will find a way forward. It is something that works on the ground and excuses will not suffice.

I again thank the Senator. I will convey his sentiments to the Minister, Deputy Foley, and encourage her to visit the site if she has not already done so. I will tell her that an invitation has been extended.

The Government remains steadfast in its commitment to improving disability services and ensuring that people with disabilities and their families receive the necessary support. By implementing strategic policies, increasing financial investment and fostering a cross-departmental approach, the Department aims to build an inclusive society where everybody has equal opportunities to thrive. Organisations such as Teach an Saol are invaluable to the disability sector. I do not say that lightly. I say it because I believe it. I see it on the ground in my own constituency. Partnerships between people who have lived experiences and the agencies and the HSE always deliver the best outcomes. As I said, it can be arduous, slow and deeply frustrating. I encourage the Senator not to lose heart and faith. Politicians in the Upper House and the Lower House will try to pursue the Departments to ensure they are proactive, progress solutions and deliver the outcomes the Senator has requested.

Cancer Services

The Minister of State, Deputy Murnane O'Connor, is very welcome. Imagine going to the GP for a routine check-up, the equivalent of a national car test, NCT, when you reach a milestone birthday. The GP measures and weighs you, takes your blood pressure and temperature and listens to your pulse. It is, I assume, a thorough examination. The GP reassures you. Everything is clear and you appear to be perfectly healthy. If you keep living an active and balanced lifestyle, you can expect to live to a healthy old age.

Six months later, you receive the devastating news that you have a 7 cm growth. It is stage 3 invasive cancer. It was there at the time of your check-up but the GP did not stop it because it was as if you were wearing a coat that prevented them from carrying out a proper examination. This is what happened to Siobhán Freeney. She went for a routine mammogram in the summer of 2015. By Christmas, she had been diagnosed with a stage 3 invasive lobular carcinoma. It is a type of breast cancer that starts as a growth of cells in the breast's milk-producing glands.

Now imagine that the same thing happens to the person you love and depend on more than anyone else in the world, namely, your mother. That is what happened to Martha Lovett Cullen, whose mother, Marian, received even worse news. Twelve months after her clear mammogram in 2020, she received a diagnosis of terminal stage 4 metastatic breast cancer. How could this happen to two different women in different parts of the country seven years apart? They both had significant quantities of dense, non-fatty tissue within their breasts. This dense breast tissue, which is fibrous and muscular, makes it difficult for a standard mammogram to see potential growths or tumours. Breast density levels are impossible to assess visually or by touch. They can, however, be measured during a standard mammogram. The radiographer carrying out the mammogram should be able to note the presence of dense breast tissue and advise women undergoing a breast check that further investigation through an ultrasound or MRI scan will be required to confirm any seemingly clear results. I am not being alarmist, but women need to be aware that a clear mammogram result does not mean they are clear of cancer. It means that no cancer is visible. Absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence.

Siobhán's treatment was successful. She beat the cancer and became a fierce advocate, highlighting the issue of breast density. Marian was not so lucky. In September 2024, the cancer took her life. Her daughter, Martha, found a purpose within her grief and just like her mother, Siobhán, she harnessed her fierce determination to ensure that Irish women were aware of the issue. This is how I, a woman who will shortly be attending my first mammogram when I turn 50 in September, first heard about breast density. If I had not been aware of it, I would have accepted a clear result as just that - clear. I know from the reaction of several of my senatorial colleagues and friends that when I raised this issue a month ago, it was the first time that many of us had heard of this also.

Breast density is not unusual. In fact, it is virtually the norm. It is estimated that between 43% and 50% of women have dense breast tissue. Siobhán, Martha and I hope that, as women, the Minister of State and the Minister will appreciate the urgency and necessity of this. It is already done in every state in America and in Australia, Canada and several of our European neighbours. This is information that is easily derived by the radiologist at the time of a mammogram and we ask that this be passed on to the women at the time of their screening. Clearly, women need to know whether they have dense breast tissue. They also need to know the potential consequences of that information. I implore the Minister, within the lifetime of the Seanad, to introduce a Bill to ensure that all women are clearly informed whether they have non-dense or dense breast tissue, after a mammogram. Clear guidance should also be provided on what their breast density means and on any additional screening options, such as an MRI or ultrasound. GPs should receive this information so that they can properly advise their patients.

I thank the Senator for telling those stories about the families affected by this. I see where she is coming from.

I am taking this matter on behalf of the Minister for Health, Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill. The Minister and I are dedicated to enhancing Ireland's population screening programmes. These play a crucial role in our health services by facilitating early treatment and thereby promoting the overall health of our community. This is a priority for the Government.

Some 3,500 women are diagnosed with breast cancer in Ireland every year. About one third of these will have cancer detected through screening. The breast cancer screening programme currently invites women between the ages of 50 and 69 to attend. The Senator mentioned that she will go for her check-up soon. It is important that everyone who receives notice to attend for a check-up does so. It is crucial that women have their mammograms.

The programme for Government commits to raising the age for breast checks in accordance with the latest standards from the Health Information and Quality Authority, HIQA. To this end, the National Screening Advisory Committee, NSCA, has asked to look at the evidence for the expansion of the age range. This is being looked at. Significant investment continues to be made in BreastCheck. This includes an additional €2.9 million allocated this year, with the approval of 22 whole-time equivalent posts. This funding will assist in increasing capacity that will enable services to develop to meet women's evolving needs and ensure equal access for all.

Regarding the question of breast density, such a measurement is currently not captured for women attending screenings, as the Senator correctly noted. However, it is part of a routine practice in the symptomatic breast disease service to include a comment on breast density in a mammogram report. If something does happen within that, it is shown on the report. Nevertheless, conflating screening for healthy people, without symptoms, with those experiencing symptoms is not appropriate. The focus on benefits for screening is on the people without symptoms, whereas for symptomatic services, it is on ensuring that individual patients requiring investigation go to their doctors if they note any symptoms.

It is also important to highlight that the potential incorporation of breast density measures in screening procedures is complex. There are contrasting clinical opinions on this matter. For example, the updated European Commission initiative on breast cancer highlights the low certainty of evidence surrounding the incorporation of the breast density measurement into the screening programmes. Additionally, I note that in the European Union, only two countries, Austria and the Czech Republic, are currently reporting the breast density measurement as part of routine breast screening. I note that the European Society of Breast Imaging, EUSOBI, recommends the offering of breast MRI screening to women with extremely dense breast tissue, which is a minority of women with denser breast tissue. The existence of contrasting significant positions reinforces the need for careful and detailed consideration of the matter.

In this regard, I highlight that any proposed changes to Ireland's cancer screening programmes will be facilitated through establishing evidence-driven protocols. That is being looked at. The NSAC is the independent expert group that considers any proposed changes to screening programmes. It reviews the evidence robustly and transparently and against internationally accepted criteria before making recommendations to the Minister for Health. I am pleased to confirm that the committee has asked the Health Information and Quality Authority to review evidence for both an expansion of the age range of the BreastCheck screening as well as to consider the potential introduction of a standard breast density measurement. That is the good news today. Work is expected to start in the coming months. It is important to note that, as both elements of the review are anticipated to be complex, it will need time to complete.

The Minister of State's final comment on expanding the age range for mammograms and the introduction of a breast density check was good news, but this is a matter of urgency. As I outlined in those stories, six months for a diagnosis can make a significant difference. I know that there is a review. I invite the Minister of State and the Minister for Health to a briefing we are having in the AV room on 27 May at 1 p.m. We will be joined by Professor William Gallagher from UCD, and Martha and Siobhán will be there to present their own stories. They will present an informative, patient-centred look at breast density.

I have learned about breast density and I know what to ask for when I go to my radiographer but many people put their trust in their health professionals or might not have the confidence to raise this matter with a health professional. I do not think it is a big request. If the Minister for Health is not able to introduce a Bill herself, I would love it if she supported a Bill introduced by our Cross-Party Group or, in the Dáil, by my colleague Deputy Sherlock, who is our Labour Party spokesperson for health, and if the Government could get behind such a Bill.

Unfortunately, I have to let the Minister of State go to vote in the Dáil.

Cuireadh an Seanad ar fionraí ar 2.57 p.m. agus cuireadh tús leis arís ar 3.09 p.m.
Sitting suspended at 2.57 p.m. and resumed at 3.09 p.m.

I ask the Minister of State to briefly respond to Senator Cosgrove and then we will move on.

In summary, I reiterate that the matter of breast density measurements and screening is a complex one without clear scientific consensus on how best to proceed. I welcome the fact that work is due to commence shortly on this consideration. The Senator knows now at least it is being considered. The evidence review for the expansion of the BreastCheck, including potential introduction of a standardised breast density measure, remains a key priority for the NSAC and is expected to commence later this year. The Minister looks forward to receiving a recommendation from the committee.

I recognise that attending breast cancer screening can be an anxious time for individuals. It is vital that the service provided is evidence-based and centred on the people who participate in it. Screening programmes must balance early detection with the need to minimise harm or worry.

It is important to remind the Chamber that screening is for healthy people without symptoms. Anyone who becomes aware of symptoms or has worries should contact medical professionals, who will arrange follow-up care. Screening saves lives and is free. Early detection may often mean simpler and more successful treatment. Therefore, I strongly encourage everyone to attend when they receive an invitation.

Primary Care Centres

It is lovely to see the Minister of State here. I wish to raise a very serious issue for the people of Kanturk and the wider north Cork area, that is, the ongoing delay and uncertainty surrounding the delivery of the Kanturk primary healthcare centre. This project has been promised for the community for a long time - years, in fact. The closure of SouthDoc in Kanturk in 2023 was justified explicitly on the basis that the community would get a healthcare facility. The closure forced patients - older people, vulnerable people, people with sick families and ill children - to travel to Mallow. Some do not have access to cars, and the public transport system in rural Ireland is not great. At the time, the then Minister, Stephen Donnelly, gave assurances that the new primary care centre would be a solution. The message to the people of Kanturk at the time was that they had to wait, everything would happen, and the process and the new centre would be there to meet their needs.

The people of Kanturk waited patiently, but just over a week ago we learned that the developer had pulled out of the project. The people of Kanturk have been let down once again. There are no timelines, there is no clarity and there is no replacement plan in place, so people are anxious, as the Minister of State can imagine. It is just more and more disappointment for a community that has already paid a huge price for its healthcare. The building is not just about a building; the fundamental lack of healthcare infrastructure in rural Ireland is the bigger problem. The question is how rural Ireland and rural communities are consistently expected to do more with less - to travel further, to wait longer and to accept decisions without any consultation or transparency. We often talk in this House about health inequalities. Here is a real-life example happening in front of us, right this second. Urban centres are expanding their services while towns like Kanturk and other rural areas are losing the few healthcare services they have left.

I ask the Minister of State to clarify the following. Why did the developer pull out of this project? What engagement has the HSE or the Department had with the developer or even alternative partners for this project? What immediate steps are being taken to ensure that the people of Kanturk are not abandoned and that the healthcare facility will actually be provided? We have to be honest: if this were an urban area, the service would be already up and running, but because it is Kanturk and it is rural, it is put on the back burner once again. The people of Kanturk deserve this centre. They have waited so long for a healthcare facility like this. The healthcare they need must be local, accessible and reliable.

I thank the Minister of State for coming in. I await her response.

I am a big believer in health facilities, care facilities or what we sometimes call injury clinics around the country. I am a big fan of those, in particular in rural areas. They are definitely needed and they are a great way for people to be able to come together in communities and have the services they need.

I am taking this matter on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Carroll MacNeill. I thank Senator Ryan for raising it and for the opportunity to update the House.

A central objective of the programme for Government is to deliver increased levels of integrated healthcare with service delivery, redirected towards general practice, primary care and community-based services to enable what is called a home-first approach. Integral to this is the development of primary care centres across the country in local communities such as Kanturk. What the Senator said is 100% right: it is vital to have such centres in rural parts of the country. Primary care centres form an important part of our healthcare infrastructure, providing a single point of access to primary and community care services for individuals. They also serve as a resource more broadly for the community, creating a focal point for local health initiatives or providing community groups with a place to meet.

It is for this reason that the development of primary care centres is a huge part of our Sláintecare remit. Significant progress has been made in the delivery of these primary care centres, with 179 now open and a further five under construction. The centres offer a tangible example of the investment the Government is making in community-based health infrastructure.

A new primary care centre is planned for Kanturk and will be delivered by way of an optional lease model. The Senator will be aware that the HSE had previously advertised and identified a preferred developer for this new centre in Kanturk and the planning permission had been secured. Unfortunately, this preferred developer recently withdrew from the project, primarily due to increases in building costs. As a result, the HSE intends to readvertise for a new proposal to develop Kanturk primary care centre. This is what is happening now with the primary care centre. The HSE advises that the readvertisement of the primary care centre on the eTenders procurement platform is expected to take place in the coming weeks. This is the first step in the procurement process.

The Minister fully understands and recognises that this is a disappointing development at this stage. I can see that it is very disappointing and is frustrating for the people in the local area who have been awaiting the centre for some time. Unfortunately, in order to proceed the project will need to be readvertised. It is, however, welcome news that the HSE is progressing with the Kanturk primary care centre and is going ahead with the readvertisement process.

The Minister wishes to assure the Senator that the Government remains committed to the continued development of primary care centres throughout the country and, specifically, the provision of a primary care centre in Kanturk. That is what is happening now.

The news is welcome that Kanturk will eventually get a primary care centre. The issue, however, is that the people of Kanturk still have no out-of-hours service or primary care centre. A building in the middle of Kanturk that could be used as an interim centre for out-of-hours care has been identified. Equally, I have been contacted by a developer who is interested in this kind of project. I would really welcome the opportunity to work with the Department to see how we can progress this and to engage with the community to let them know what is happening. They do need some kind of out-of-hours service. While this building in the middle of Kanturk is not the end goal of course, it could be used between now and when the primary care centre is built.

I thank the Senator. I understand the need involved. Even on the basis of the most recent census, we can see the way the population is growing. It is important that we have the services in place. Unfortunately, from time to time, there can be delays within the development of primary care centres. There were a variety of circumstances in this instance, including the withdrawal of the developer. That sometimes happens. The HSE can confirm that the readvertisement of the Kanturk primary care centre is expected to progress in the next few weeks.

When the project relating to Kanturk primary care centre is readvertised under the open competition – namely, where one must advertise and go through the normal process – the HSE will again evaluate submissions under the set criteria. As always, any selected proposal will be subject to the normal HSE approval process. All aspects will have to be examined, as the Senator is aware. The Minister wishes to assure the Senator that she, her officials and the Department will continue to engage with the HSE to progress both the completion of this new primary care centre and the further development of such centres throughout the country.

Given what the Senator said about engaging, perhaps she could talk to the Department and the HSE to see if something can happen in the meantime in order that some sort of solution might be arrived at. I will communicate what she said t the Minister and her Department. I am sure someone will come back to the Senator on the matter. I thank her so much for raising this matter.

Rental Sector

I welcome the Minister of State. I have not had an opportunity to congratulate him on his appointment. He has been in the House but our paths have not crossed. We worked very well and collaboratively on housing previously, especially concerning the Planning and Development Act 2024, as it is now. The Minister of State has vast experience in and knowledge of local government, particularly regarding housing. He is clearly suited to the post and I wish him every success.

I raise the issue of the need for the Minister for housing to commit to a review of the residential tenancies legislation to regulate the landlord functions of local authority-owned dwellings and to formalise this aspect. I was prompted to do this because a great announcement was made by the Minister of State's Department to clap itself on the back, and rightly so, for the level of inspections of the private sector. It is right that there should be inspections of the private sector. However, no one is talking about who is inspecting council properties. I do not know if the Minister of State saw a report from Samantha Libreri on RTÉ featuring a property in Coolock in north county Dublin with a rodent infestation and electrical sockets hanging off the walls. The tenant was live on the news as well talking about her experience of trying to get support. The report is in the news on the RTÉ Player and can be seen anytime.

I am calling for the mandatory inspection and certification of all properties. We have this approach for the private sector but not for the public sector. Some of the largest landlords in this country are our 31 local authorities, which have thousands of houses. Their tenants should have exactly the same rights and be afforded the same rights and opportunities in terms of redress. We also need certification. Of course, the embarrassment is that many of these properties would not pass certification. Many of the local authority properties we expect people to live in have tenants who in most cases have very limited means and cannot afford repairs themselves. I do not want to use a generalisation, but they are not getting the support of their landlord, which in this case is one of the 31 local authorities.

The figures published by the Minister of State's Department show that more than half of all private rental properties inspected last year did not initially meet the legally enforced standards. No mention was made of the local authorities and the standards in that regard. Let us put figures on this. The necessary standards were not met by 37,800 properties. That was out of a total of 62,085 properties inspected. Under the 2019 housing regulations, all private rental properties on the market must meet strict criteria in terms of heat, ventilation, natural light, fire safety, and health and safety. The Minister of State knows the score. Again, there is no mention of the local authorities. Council tenants have no right to an independent inspection of their homes. They simply do not have that right. They must go back to their local authority, which in this case is also their landlord. I think this is wrong. Council tenants should have access to independent adjudication in respect of complaints procedures. The only right they have now is to go to the Ombudsman. If they have a load of dosh, they can hand it to a load of lawyers and go through the courts, but I do not think that is right, appropriate or fair. It should not happen.

I have raised the issue of the Housing Commission report published in May 2024. It is a disgrace that we have not discussed it in the House. There has not been enough discussion of the report and many of its recommendations. For some reason, the Government does not wish to take on board many of those recommendations. It has taken on board some, but not many others. I reckon we should look at the report again if there is an opportunity in the future.

I am calling for tenants in local authorities to have full and equal access to these the Residential Tenancies Board. The current situation is simply unacceptable. I will leave it there, other than to say that we should give all tenants the same rights. Let us not distinguish between the rights of public and private tenants. All tenants should have the same rights.

I thank Senator Boyhan for submitting his Commencement matter. It gives me an opportunity to address an important matter in the House.

The Residential Tenancies Acts 2004 to 2024 regulate tenancies in the residential rental sector covering private renters, cost renters and social renters with approved housing bodies and also regulate tenancies and licences in student-specific accommodation. The Residential Tenancies Acts set out the rights and obligations of landlords and tenants. The Residential Tenancies Board, RTB, was established as an independent statutory body under the Acts to regulate the rental housing sector by maintaining a national register of tenancies, resolving disputes between tenants and landlords, acting to ensure compliance with rental law and providing information to public, tenants and landlords to ensure that tenancies run smoothly and are providing reliable data and insights to inform policy, which the Senator and I would have reviewed as members of the relevant joint Oireachtas committee in the previous term.

The Residential Tenancies Act applies to every dwelling that is the subject of a tenancy, subject to a limited number of exemptions. As the Senator rightly pointed out, the Act does not apply to dwellings let by local authorities to social tenants. The Residential Tenancies (Amendment) Act 2015 brought tenancies relating to approved housing bodies under the remit of the RTB. The Housing Acts 1966 to 2024 govern local authority social housing tenancies. These Acts provide a range of extensive protections for tenants, including security of tenure, management of antisocial behaviour and a differential rents system. Furthermore, local authority tenants can avail of the customer complaints procedure in place in all local authorities regarding any issues they may have in dealing with their local authority in the context of their housing situation. Following the making and processing of any such complaint, if a local authority tenant still considers that they have been adversely affected by a local authority's action or lack of action which they consider unfair or unreasonable, they may make a complaint to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman can examine complaints about how local authorities carry out their every day executive and administrative activities. These include complaints, delays or failures to take action on housing issues.

The Housing Commission has recommended the regulation of landlord functions relating to local authority-owned dwellings and the formalising of local authority-tenant relationships. Obviously, the Department of housing is reviewing and assessing the report of the Housing Commission, which, as the Senator pointed out, was published in May of last year. Given the breadth of housing policy areas covered in the report, the quantum of recommendations and actions involved and the complex interlinkages between them, this is a significant body of work. It looks at prioritisation, cost implications, sequencing, timing and the practicalities of implementation. Within this context, the recommendation relating to the relationship between local authority tenants and the RTB and any potential changes to that relationship are being considered.

The kernel of this matter is simple: all tenants in this country, regardless of whether they are renting in the private or public sector, should be treated the same. I am making that case. As the Minister of State rightly indicated and as I already told him, the report of the Housing Commission contains strong recommendations to the effect that the residential tenancy legislation should be extended to cover local authority tenants and their relationships. That is a reasonable and fair request. I do not think you can tolerate or allow two arrangements of protections for tenants to run in tandem. All tenants are tenants. We want to encourage tenants to be good tenants. We also want landlords to be compliant with the law. I do not think it is tenable to suggest that the Minister for housing is currently satisfied. It is me who is not satisfied. I tabled this matter because I spoke to hundreds of councillors, including many in the Minister's party, who say they are constantly being asked to lobby in respect basic needs and health and safety issues around tenancies in local authority social housing, a matter that comes under the Department's remit.

What is my ask? I will close on this. I ask the Minister of State to go back to the officials in the Department to see if we can consider extending the legislation to include social tenants and give them the same rights as private tenants.

I again thank Senator Boyhan for raising this matter. I take the points he has made on board. Obviously, the Housing Commission made recommendations in this space. These are being considered by the Department. There are obvious issues with sequencing, cost implications and so on involved. As a result, the Senator will appreciate that there is a significant body of work to be done.

There is no point introducing something if it cannot be implemented. The last thing we want to see is a system being implemented that is not resourced adequately. The Senator would rightly be back in this Chamber complaining that the people he is advocating for are not able to access the protections he is speaking to.

In the interim, the Housing Acts 1996 to 2024 provide protections. I encourage local authority tenants who have issues to raise them through the complaints procedure and the Ombudsman but I assure the Senator recommendations from the commission are being kept under consideration by the Department.

Charitable and Voluntary Organisations

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit chuig an Teach. A High Court decision last October ruled that a Valuation Tribunal subjecting Vision Ireland charity shop in Virginia, County Cavan, to commercial rates was incorrect in law. The judgment represented the conclusion of a legal challenge that began back in 2019 by Vision Ireland, then NCBI, which now has more than 120 charity shops nationwide. While the judgment currently applies to a single Vision Ireland charity retail store location, the charity's lawyers argue it set a significant precedent that many charity shops may follow, operating for charitable purposes across the country to obtain an exemption from commercial rates. It was argued successfully that retail activities conducted to fund the charitable purposes of the organisation should be exempt from commercial rates under the Valuation Act. Surely it is time the Government provided clarity for local authorities on this matter.

There are approximately 550 charity shops in Ireland, of which Vision Ireland operates 121. In 2024, Vision Ireland paid approximately €450,000 in commercial rates. It is estimated that the total amount of commercial rates collected from all charity shops annually is approximately €2.1 million, which is a tiny fraction of the approximate €1.5 billion in commercial rates received by local authorities annually. This cost takes funds directly away from charity shops providing services for blind and low-vision children and adults. The funds should instead be supporting the charitable purposes of the organisations operating charity shops for people with cancer, in wheelchairs and in hospices; the homeless; overseas aid; and animal welfare.

In County Monaghan, our local family resource centre, Teach na nDaoine, operates two social enterprises on a strict not-for-profit basis, meaning all proceeds go directly towards charitable causes, rather than private gain. I commend Packie Kelly and his team on the fantastic work they do in Teach na nDaoine. They support vital community services while promoting sustainability through the circular economy. Given their charitable status and contribution to social and environmental well-being, they feel it is reasonable and beneficial to exempt them from commercial rates.

Many charity shops rely heavily on volunteers reducing operational costs and providing meaningful opportunities for community engagement. Revenue generated from sales directly supports local and national charitable activities such as homelessness relief, mental health supports, healthcare initiatives and social inclusion programmes. Every euro spent is invested in essential services for vulnerable communities.

Another relevant factor is that charity shops are key players in the circular economy, which focuses on reducing waste, extending the life cycle of products and minimising environmental harm. By providing a second life to these items, these shops significantly reduce carbon footprints associated with new production and disposal. Teach na nDaoine's upcycling hub estimated it had diverted 40 tonnes of textile, furniture and household goods from landfill last year alone.

Charity shops offer low-cost clothing, furniture and household essentials to individuals and families who might otherwise struggle to afford them. These charity shops happen to pay rates to the local authorities when those funds could be going to those in most need of them. I hope the Government is aware of this court decision and that it will eventually move on down to all charity shops, which should be exempt or, at the very least, pay minimal rates compared with what they pay currently.

I thank Senator Gallagher for raising this question, which gives me the opportunity to discuss the commercial rates position regarding registered charities and charity shops. As the Senator will be aware, Tailte Éireann is an independent Government agency under the aegis of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. Tailte Éireann provides a property registration system, a valuation service and a national mapping and surveying infrastructure for the State. Tailte Éireann is independent in the exercise of its valuation functions under the Valuation Act 2001, as amended, and the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage has no function in regard to decisions made by the body.

The Valuation Act 2001, as amended, provides that a property is rateable until it is expressly exempted. Schedule 4 of the Act of 2001 lists the categories of property which are not liable for commercial rates. Paragraph 16 of Schedule 4 provides that a charitable organisation that uses a property exclusively for charitable purposes other than for private profit is exempt from the payment of rates. However, the question of the rateability or otherwise of individual charity shops would need to be considered on the basis of the particular circumstances of the case and how the provisions of the Act apply in that specific case. Generally, shops operated by charitable organisations are rateable on the basis that the retail activity conducted therein is deemed not to be of a charitable purpose within the meaning of the legislation. As a matter of course, Tailte Éireann examines all properties on their individual merits by reference to the relevant statutory provisions governing the operation of the Valuation Act 2001, as amended. It is understood from Tailte Éireann that the long-held position is that charity shops, as retail units, are rateable; that is, while the occupier of the retail unit may be a charitable organisation, the activity of retailing itself is not a charitable purpose.

There are a number of avenues of redress for an occupier of a rateable property who is dissatisfied with the determination of the valuation by Tailte Éireann made under the provisions of the Valuation Act 2001, as amended. First, before a determination is made, there is a right to make a representation to Tailte Éireann in relation to a proposed valuation. Later in the process, if the occupier is still dissatisfied with the determination, there is a right of appeal to the Valuation Tribunal, which is an independent body set up for the purpose of hearing appeals against determinations of Tailte Éireann. There is also a right of appeal to the higher courts on a point of law.

While I do not want to discuss the individual case that the Senator has referenced, the position as set out is the position that has been the case heretofore. I appreciate the points the Senator has made in his contribution and the value that organisations like Vision Ireland bring to the people they support and serve. I thank the Senator for raising the matter.

I thank the Minister of State for his comprehensive response, although it might not be what I wanted to hear. While I appreciate the Minister of State may not want to say too much about the court case, the court did make a finding in that regard and I wonder what the knock-on effects will be for other charitable organisations. Without going into the legalities of it, fairness should come in here. Charity shops are paying commercial rates to the local authorities in question. The losers here are those who would benefit from those funds and, generally speaking, they are the people who are in most need of them. When will the Department get the chance to digest the conclusions of that court case? It may have implications going forward. I sincerely hope that will be the case.

I thank the Senator again. His points are very well made. As I said, the issue of charities in and of themselves is not in question here. It is about the activity carried out within the commercial premises. The long-held position has been that retailing does not exempt a charity from rates. I appreciate the point the Senator has made and will engage with officials on this.

Social Welfare Appeals

I wish to bring to the Minister of State's attention something that is deeply concerning for families in County Limerick and throughout the State, namely, the persistent and unacceptable wait times for domiciliary care appeals. I am acutely aware of a case involving a family in County Limerick who are in their 37th week of waiting to hear about the progress of their appeal. This delay is not just a bureaucratic failure but a human crisis for this family. I will give the Minister of State their story. This is a family with four children, one of whom is a 12-year-old girl with autism. She faces daily challenges no child should face alone. Her parents describe her as a sweet child, but one who struggles significantly throughout her day with sensory issues, social anxiety, dietary needs, communication and emotional regulation. She attends school but she cannot participate in most activities, school outings or sport. Birthday parties, team games and even basic social interactions are simply too overwhelming. She experiences what is known as autistic burnout and dysregulation, often daily. He mother explains how they manage this with incredible patience and care using scaffolding techniques, strict routine and structure to help her recover her sense of safety and calm. She still requires assistance with all aspects of personal care, including showering, washing her hair and dressing. She cannot tie her shoelaces or ride a bike.

Despite doing everything in their power to support their daughter, her parents have been refused domiciliary care allowance. They appealed that decision and the appeals officer received their document on 20 August 2024, but 37 weeks later there has been nothing. There has been no update from mygov.ie and no appeals officer assigned. When they rang for information they were told the appeal was simply still in the queue. In week 37, the family remain in limbo with no timeline, clarity or support. The mother said something that stayed with me. She said “We feel our autistic child is just completely invisible”. That is what this backlog is doing; it is making children with complex needs feel invisible.

During a recent training session, we were told by the Department of Social Protection that the disability and illness section is the fastest growing area of the Department’s budget, yet the appeals office still operates with delays dating back to the post-Covid period. This is simply not good enough. Families like this are not statistics but human beings under enormous emotional and financial pressure being forced to wait in silence while their children continue to suffer.

What is being done? Are there plans to recruit or second staff to the appeals office? Are there plans to expand the staffing and resources in this fast-growing sector? Without urgent intervention, more and more families are going to fall through the cracks. We cannot allow our system to punish people for needing help, and certainly not when it is for children.

I thank the Senator very much. As she is well aware, I am not the Minister for Social Protection, but I am the Minister of State with responsibility for AI and digitalisation. I tell her wholeheartedly that if I achieve anything over the next five years, it will be to bring efficiencies into our public services and public bodies so parents and families are not left forgotten or "invisible", as was said. We must bring in the technology to enable staff to get through the backlogs we hear so much about.

In the script, which, as Senator Collins knows, was prepared by officials in the Department, I am told the wait is 20 weeks, but Senator Collins has given an exact personal account of a family that has been waiting 37 weeks. It is not acceptable and we have to do whatever we can to support public bodies and public agencies to bring in technology.

I believe there is a much faster and more efficient way, which would not take away the human-centred approach but would cut through the analysis of an application, which can be very repetitive. I would like to see us have the ability to take the drudgery out of the work for our officials and be able to get to the bottom line and the answer for families. Not having a response or not being told an officer has been appointed to a case should be relatively easy to deal with, to give parents and families a response, a pathway and a timeline. This is a very fair expectation to have. As Minister of State I will support the Department of the Minister, Deputy Calleary, and other Departments in introducing measures in order that we can get the efficiencies Senator Collins has quite rightly raised and, more importantly, which families deserve. I ask Senator Collins to bear with me as I give her the official answer.

The social welfare appeals office is an office in the Department of Social Protection responsible for determining appeals against decisions on social welfare entitlements. Appeals officers are independent in their decision-making functions. At the end of March 2025, the overall average processing time for all appeals was 20.9 weeks and the average processing time for a domiciliary care allowance appeal was 19.6 weeks. This is half of the actual life experience of the family Senator Collins spoke about. I am aware of the domiciliary care allowance, the relief it can bring families, the importance of the support and the reassurance of having it in the future. There is much involved in the particular case Senator Collins described and great support is required by the parents of the little girl to do the normal everyday things in life. They should have this peace of mind. I always say that if politicians do not receive a good answer, they should still go back and tell people as this also causes frustration.

The time given to process an appeal is for all aspects of the appeals process, including initial validation of the appeal to ensure adequate grounds have been provided, following referral of the appeal to the relevant scheme in the Department for review. Senator Collins has pointed out that the family has not even had this initial contact. Where, in the first instance, a decision is not made in favour of the applicant, an appeal is considered by an appeals officer, which may require holding an oral hearing. A significant proportion of cases are revised by the Department in favour of the applicant during the review process. This does not always mean the initial decision was incorrect. A decision can be revised because the person making the application or the appeal provided additional information not made available when the decision was first made. This is the benefit of the oral hearings when families go before an appeals officer to speak about their day-to-day life experiences. Those filling in application forms are so busy with the day-to-day running of their homes and taking care of their loved ones that they do not have the time for it. For many applications there is a formula which ordinary people do not know and are not familiar with as they do not complete them every day. This does not make it very helpful. Where new information, in particular medical information, is provided on appeal, it may require further investigation which can add to the time taken in the appeals process.

I thank the Minister of State. I am excited to hear about the AI. We all go through our lives with everything happening in an instant. It would be fantastic to see quicker ways of processing these appeals, but this will not help this family today. I will get on to the Minister directly because 37 weeks is too long for the family to wait and to feel invisible. When my office contacts the Minister, we receive a generic reply that a case is in an appeals process and it should take however many weeks, be it 20.9 weeks or 19.9 weeks, but in this case it is 37 weeks and counting. By the time AI catches up, this family will be at the end of their rope, as it were. I am sure the Minister of State knows from various cases that the cost to these families is unbelievable and impossible to measure. They have to go for private appointments and take children out of school.

This child cannot go on school tours, so she has to be taken out of school for the school tour, which is disappointing for the child and her family. They must take her on a special tour of their own to make up for the day this girl is not getting with her peers.

I thank the Minister of State for her reply but I will contact the office as well.

The Senator can share the details with me, but I encourage her to share them with Minister, Dara Calleary. I will convey to the Minister the thoughts, views and, more importantly, the sentiments of what the Senator has put forward in her argument. I know that if the Minister can do anything on an individual basis for that family, he will try to ensure that their case is expedited as quickly as possible.

We have a big opportunity within the public service to create efficiencies. I have no doubt that all of the officials who deal with these applications are buried in paperwork. If digitalisation and AI can remove the drudgery of that work, it would allow officials to adopt a human-centred approach to these applications when they consider them. It would allow them to take stock of what a family is suffering and give the family the adequate support they need in a timely fashion, meaning we all win.

Cuireadh an Seanad ar fionraí ar 3.56 p.m. agus cuireadh tús leis arís ar 4.03 p.m.
Sitting suspended at 3.56 p.m. and resumed at 4.03 p.m.
Barr
Roinn